Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: lady lawyer; Jim Robinson; ConjunctionJunction; Al B.; SolidWood; Leisler; greyfoxx39; ...
Wrong. Don't lie for your Master, RomneyBOT.

YOU live in Utah. Here is Bastard fascist Mitt Romney
using the citizens of Massachusetts for his "experiment"
imposing DEATH PANELS and ROMNEYCARE.

And, yes, the SOB uses that word.


AFTER you impose RomneyCARE on your own state, RomneyBOT
your words may have some sincerity. Now there is NONE.

"One of the traditional methods of imposing statism
or socialism on people has been by way of medicine..."

President Ronald Reagan

Death Panels imposed by Mitt Romney (ObamaCARE=RomneyCARE).



204 posted on 11/19/2010 10:07:12 AM PST by Diogenesis ('Freedom is the light of all sentient beings.' - Optimus Prime)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies ]


To: Diogenesis

You have a tendency to forget facts which don’t conform to your biases.

Heritage did originally draft Romneycare, and they were defending it as late as 2007. See http://heritage.org/Research/Reports/2007/04/The-Massachusetts-Health-Plan-An-Update-and-Lessons-for-Other-States

I think the biggest difference between Romneycare and Obamacare was that Romneycare was an effort to confront the problem of freeriders, while strengthening private providers of care and insurance. Obamacare is designed to force private providers and insurers out of business. But, I think the fine print will put the average voter to sleep, and that Romneycare will sink Romney’s chances, at least in the primary.

Here is part of an article by Heritage Foundation explaining Romneycare’s individual mandate. The rest of the article can be found at http://heritage.org/Research/Reports/2006/04/Understanding-Key-Parts-of-the-Massachusetts-Health-Plan

Understanding Key Parts of the Massachusetts Health Plan
. Published on April 20, 2006 by Robert Moffit, Ph.D. and Nina Owcharenko WebMemo #1045

Any comprehensive plan to reform health care will contain complex, and likely contentious, provisions. The recently enacted Massachusetts plan, based on a proposal by Governor Mitt Romney, is no exception. It contains complex provisions that have raised questions and concerns. But much of this controversy stems from confusion about the provisions. Therefore, understanding these provisions, especially in the context of the larger reform, is important.

Four Points of Confusion

The individual “mandate”: Under federal law, nearly all hospitals are required to provide a certain level of treatment to all patients who visit their emergency rooms, regardless of those patients’ ability to pay. Governor Romney sought a way to prevent the free-rider problem: those who take advantage of emergency services skip out on the charges, leaving taxpayers to cover the bill. Romney proposed that state residents either purchase health insurance or, if they chose not to do so, “self insure” by posting a $10,000 bond that could be put towards the cost of any hospital care they might use but be unable to afford. The Democrat-controlled legislature rejected the Governor’s proposal and forced on state residents a different choice: buy health insurance or pay a fine.

While many oppose a mandate to buy insurance-even basic catastrophic insurance to protect the community from individuals not paying their bills-on philosophical grounds, they should still have a firm factual understanding of the Massachusetts mandate, which may be less problematic than they realize. Thanks to regulatory changes that are a part of the Massachusetts plan, residents will be able to satisfy the mandate merely by purchasing catastrophic coverage through a high-deductible health plan or a Health Savings Account (HSA). With this regulatory change, the plan will promote HSA/high-deducible plans and make health care coverage more accessible and somewhat more affordable for individuals. The state will also provide lower-income individuals with a subsidy (essentially a voucher) to help them purchase health insurance, an approach similar to the refundable health tax credits that many support at the federal level. These changes make the mandate far less of a burden on individuals than it otherwise would have been.

. . . .

Some people on FR are accusing National Review of being RINOs. Do you believe Heritage are also RINOs? I know some of the people at Heritage. I have shared podiums with them, and invited them to speak at programs I have helped to organize. They are dedicated, conservative, intellectual heavy hitters who have devoted their lives to the cause of conservativism.


206 posted on 11/19/2010 10:20:17 AM PST by lady lawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies ]

To: Diogenesis

Good to see the Slick Willardbot trash and anti-Palin derangers finally being taken out. WAY long overdue.


360 posted on 11/19/2010 1:07:41 PM PST by fieldmarshaldj (~"This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Amber Lamps !"~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson